Post by Anding & Company

What starts off as a shortcut becomes a detour. The argument is often reasonable. "Since we are transforming topic A anyway, let's also do B and C." "Since we are building a platform, let's revamp the organization." "Since we are implementing AI, let's also reshuffle the teams." Each addition makes sense on its own merits. Piled onto the original scope, they breed delays, diffuse responsibility, and exhaust the organization. The pattern is consistent – the more a transformation tries to do, the less it actually delivers. The fix is to be stringent about scope, from day one. Get the purpose, scope, and outcomes crystal clear and rock solid. In any end-to-end transformation, be explicit about what both ends represent. Then secure alignment from the right stakeholder group – PE, C-level of holding or portfolio company, and other key stakeholders. To support this outcome, we run the Value Canvas Exercise: a series of interviews with key management and investor stakeholders, followed by a workshop that produces a quantified, pressure-tested prioritization of goals. This is the moment to surface objections, doubts, and known unknowns. On the top three goals, aim for 80% alignment. Then quantify the ambition early – for example, "reduce process costs by 50%." Without a concrete target, progress cannot be measured and accountability cannot be enforced. Once the scope is committed, define early who has authority to approve changes to it. Clear decision rights prevent the back-and-forth that delays timelines and frustrates teams. Full paper – including the other seven pitfalls – linked in the comments. #PrivateEquity #Mittelstand #Transformation #ChangeManagement #OperationalExcellence #PostMergerIntegration